Monday, June 29, 2026
- Diala Qasem (Legislative Director, Rep. Carson)
diala.qasem@mail.house.gov - Megan Sims (Chief of Staff, Rep. Carson)
megan.sims@mail.house.gov - Adrienne Castro (Legislative Director, Rep. Takano)
adrienne.castro@mail.house.gov
RE: Inquiry Regarding Constitutional Framework and Analysis for H.R. 9110 (The PAID Act)
Dear Ms. Qasem, Ms. Sims, and Ms. Castro,
I am writing to you today as a constituent to learn more about the legislative development and legal foundation of H.R. 9110, the Promoting Authenticity with Influencer Disclaimers (PAID) Act, which was jointly introduced by Representatives Mark Takano and André Carson.
As our offices look to update campaign transparency laws for the modern digital era, I am highly interested in the constitutional strategy behind this bill. Given the unique First Amendment protections afforded to individual expressive speech, I am hoping your legislative teams can share a copy of the constitutional analysis or legal memoranda prepared during the drafting process.
Specifically, I would appreciate understanding how the offices plan to reconcile the disclosure mandates in H.R. 9110 with the strict legal boundaries established across the following string of controlling and foundational Supreme Court precedents:
Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886); NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1858); Bates v. City of Little Rock, 361 U.S. 516 (1960); Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960); First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Davenport, No. 23-1342 (2026); and Chiles v. Salazar, No. 24-1105 (2026).
I look forward to reviewing any background materials or legal briefs your offices can share on this matter.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[Your Indianapolis, IN Address]
[Your Phone Number / Email]
[Your Indianapolis, IN Address]
[Your Phone Number / Email]
If
Comments:
Post a Comment
